Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 9
Tshio

A little tale that contains a reflection about Geocaching, Adventure Labs, and the relations between them

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

In this hobby, a cacher doesn't "earn" anything from D or T ratings.

 

Meanwhile, our hosts are supporting those among us who like to "earn" squares on the D/T grid. 

 

So yeah, it seems "earning" is a thing.

 

Edited by Viajero Perdido
  • Upvote 3
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

In this hobby, a cacher doesn't "earn" anything from D or T ratings.  They just sorta let you know what you're in for.  

 

I agree, but even so I think I earned the T4.5 on this one I did on Tuesday (GC8X5T9):

 

fbe11397-7157-4519-bfd7-08f67e91f9dc_l.j

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, niraD said:

The terrain rating is not something you earn when you find the cache.

 

I should have used the the term "affect my statistics".  My statistics say I have 703 finds. My statistics also say I have 1 T5. 

 

58 minutes ago, niraD said:

The terrain rating is a tool for the cache owner to communicate the general nature of the "Physical effort needed to arrive at coordinates" to potential seekers.

 

The physical effort required to retrieve GCZH69 on a slow river in Ohio is not even REMOTELY in the "general nature " of "the physical effort required" climbing a 15,000 foot mountain.  No way you convince me otherwise.

The loophole used here is that "special equipment" loophole. A loophole defined by Groundspeak. That definition is accepted even although some of us see a problem with it. 

 

But I've gotten off topic. Sorry  

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, RocTheCacheBox said:

The loophole used here is that "special equipment" loophole. A loophole defined by Groundspeak. That definition is accepted even although some of us see a problem with it.

It's not a loophole. It's the definition of T5.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

"Earn" really depends on your perspective of the value of the resulting accomplishment from a technical standpoint. You certain can "earn" a 4.5 terrain - by working to complete the geocache and log it as a find, you've "earned" that accomplishment. Now whether what you "earn" and can "earn" dictates your ethics for geocaching, that's a different issue :P  But yes, given the statistics of the geocache you find are added to your profile statistics, you do technically "earn" difficulty and terrain ratings.  It's just better to value the experience above and beyond the numbers, for the mere sake of numbers.

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 1
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/7/2020 at 8:49 PM, The Jester said:

And what are you doing in here, shouldn't you be out geocaching (or Adventure Labbing) yourself, instead of joining in?

 

I was. I smashed my last year's find count.

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, niraD said:
17 hours ago, RocTheCacheBox said:

The fact that that I can [...] earn the same as terrain rating

There's the source of your confusion. The terrain rating is not something you earn when you find the cache. The terrain rating is a tool for the cache owner to communicate the general nature of the "Physical effort needed to arrive at coordinates" to potential seekers.

 

While that is true,   speaking from personal experience, floating down a river in a southern U.S. state on an inner tube takes a lot less physical effort and skill than launching a sea kayak in breaking surf and paddling a mile offshore to an island with a sea cave.    Both get a T5 rating,  but the general nature of the experience is going be significantly different.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

While that is true,   speaking from personal experience, floating down a river in a southern U.S. state on an inner tube takes a lot less physical effort and skill than launching a sea kayak in breaking surf and paddling a mile offshore to an island with a sea cave.    Both get a T5 rating,  but the general nature of the experience is going be significantly different.  

Yes, T5 can apply to vastly different journeys. The only thing you know is that special equipment is required. But the rating does communicate the fact that special equipment is required.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, niraD said:

Yes, T5 can apply to vastly different journeys. The only thing you know is that special equipment is required. But the rating does communicate the fact that special equipment is required.

 

I had a lamppost cache that was a magnetic container 15 feet up a lamppost.  To place it, I duct taped a grabber to a painter's pole and used a rope to pull the grabber handle to place the cache.  Terrain was T1.5 to place it.  I listed it at a higher difficulty because it was really high up.

 

Reviewer made me switch my D and T ratings, so it wound up being a D1.5 (it's easy to find) and a T5 (it's not easy to get to).  It's this cache if anyone is interested: GC5GV3G

 

I laughed at the "spoiler" log photos as people had fun ways to retrieve the cache.

 

T4.5 may in general be a more arduous journey than a T5.

  • Upvote 2
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

I had a lamppost cache that was a magnetic container 15 feet up a lamppost.  To place it, I duct taped a grabber to a painter's pole and used a rope to pull the grabber handle to place the cache.  Terrain was T1.5 to place it.  I listed it at a higher difficulty because it was really high up.

 

Reviewer made me switch my D and T ratings, so it wound up being a D1.5 (it's easy to find) and a T5 (it's not easy to get to).  It's this cache if anyone is interested: GC5GV3G

I think it makes sense for elevated caches to have a higher terrain rating if seekers are expected to climb or otherwise get themselves to the cache location. But I've found a number of elevated caches that were intended to be retrieved with tools, and in that case, I think it makes more sense to increase the difficulty rating, just as one might do with a gadget cache.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, niraD said:

I think it makes sense for elevated caches to have a higher terrain rating if seekers are expected to climb or otherwise get themselves to the cache location. But I've found a number of elevated caches that were intended to be retrieved with tools, and in that case, I think it makes more sense to increase the difficulty rating, just as one might do with a gadget cache.

 

I agree.  The terrain rating is supposed to represent the effort it takes to ground zero and the difficulty rating representing the effort it would take to locate  the container.  Ground zero, to me, is where the container is hidden, not necessarily just the lat/long coordinates.   The cache might be easily visible from the base of a tree, and thus a low difficulty rating.  

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:
8 hours ago, niraD said:

I think it makes sense for elevated caches to have a higher terrain rating if seekers are expected to climb or otherwise get themselves to the cache location. But I've found a number of elevated caches that were intended to be retrieved with tools, and in that case, I think it makes more sense to increase the difficulty rating, just as one might do with a gadget cache.

 

I agree.  The terrain rating is supposed to represent the effort it takes to ground zero and the difficulty rating representing the effort it would take to locate  the container.  Ground zero, to me, is where the container is hidden, not necessarily just the lat/long coordinates.   The cache might be easily visible from the base of a tree, and thus a low difficulty rating. 

 

If a container is attached in the tree, you have to get to the cache (higher T). If a container is hanging in a tree you can't reasonably be expected to climb and are expected to use a tool I'd say higher D. And I'd say CO's discretion between D or T if they intend you to climb a tree but the container is hanging (I know many who would 'find a TOTT' to help).

Elevated on a lamp post I'd say almost certainly higher D than T. But that's not to say someone could treat the T higher :P I've often found a cache where I ended up exerting a T4+ effort to find a T1.5 or 2. :lol:

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Hello guys,

Several weeks pssed since this topic was started. There have been many insightful thoughts, and now I want to sum up some thoughts.

First of all, the good work made by @IceColdUK with his/her poll left me shocked. It really seems that the majority of geocachers is very happy with ALs in general, and with having each step count as a found. I think I'm going to accept this over time, but at the moment this makes me very sad, and started a line of thoughts that maybe will find space in another topic.

Then, for @Jimrky to know, I wrote a e-mail to geocaching HQ, pointing out the illogicity of ALs. They answered me saying "we'll take your feedback in consideration". What was I expecting?

Probably, I was wrong all the time thinking about geocaching as a treasure hunt and not as a videogame like pokemon go, but at this point I just want to say how I see the whole thing. Please note this is not for starting a new discussion on the topic, it's just a resigned reflection over the thing, and I already know that the majority of people will find it a no-sense. In my surely wrong point of view, geocaching is about going to a place and finding a container. Surely, wandering around and discovering new places is a thing I love and a huge part of the game, but in the very end, there should be the coveted worn container and the damp moldy logbook to sign. Otherwise it would not be called geocaching, but trekking or sightseeing.

That being said, thanks again to everyone who took an interest in this topic and contributed in any way. To the next time!

  • Upvote 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Tshio said:

It really seems that the majority of geocachers is very happy with ALs in general, and with having each step count as a found. I think I'm going to accept this over time, but at the moment this makes me very sad, and started a line of thoughts that maybe will find space in another topic.

First, I'm still not convinced most geocachers like one find for every stage effect. I think most either don't notice it or shrug their shoulders at it.

 

But more importantly, I think you are making a mistake by thinking that any reaction by geocachers towards ALs reflects on geocaching in general. ALs are something else completely. I like them fine, but I don't want the rest of geocaching to be more like them. I'm curious how they'll be integrated with geocaching, if that ever happens, but I'm definitely hoping the integration doesn't negatively impact the real game of geocaching. And so far, the lack of integration has meant they have almost no impact of the rest of geocaching, limited to a handful of bonus caches that have to be ignored by people that don't care.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

I don't believe ALs should be counted toward geocaching finds, but in my opinion I could see some of the technology used with ALs being incorporated into other geocache types.

 

For example...

 

There are certain cache types in which one is supposed to message the cache owner for confirmation, such as earth caches and virtual caches.  What if, instead of messaging the owner for permission to log a find, a geofence was established for those cache types in which the questions could be answered directly for the cache online, which instead of giving you a find like with ALs, allowed you to log the cache as found.  Then one wouldn't need to message the cache owner, the answers could be more concrete and immediate feedback could be given as to whether you got the answer right.

 

It's not ideal for non-smartphone users, and obviously the idea would have to be thought out more, but it's just an idea that would incorporate some of the new tech with the existing game.

  • Upvote 2
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Tshio said:

Probably, I was wrong all the time thinking about geocaching as a treasure hunt and not as a videogame like pokemon go, but at this point I just want to say how I see the whole thing.

 

Please note this is not for starting a new discussion on the topic, it's just a resigned reflection over the thing, and I already know that the majority of people will find it a no-sense. 

 

Surely, wandering around and discovering new places is a thing I love and a huge part of the game, but in the very end, there should be the coveted worn container and the damp moldy logbook to sign. Otherwise it would not be called geocaching, but trekking or sightseeing.

 

Sorta agree, but we've never seen geocaching as a "treasure hunt", but simply a location hobby.    

By logs we believe much of the issues with theft are due to new folks "looking for treasure", find none, and take trackables as treasure.

We see the "language of location" doesn't seem that important anymore to some, and this new thing can even be "located" indoors.

Maybe if the actions of others affected me in any way, it'd bug me more, but I still enjoy long walks in the woods.     :)

 - It just takes some thought to accomplish now. 

 

Too late.  :laughing:

 

Some of our favorite areas had only Virtuals and Earthcaches.   No container/log  (we haven't seen logbooks in years...).

I'd be a happy camper if more people would go trekking again. Distance and this hobby not much of a thing here.

There's a lot of multis in towns/cities that we really enjoyed.  After completing them, I guess we were sightseeing.   ;)

Some areas, Geotours are popular too.    

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

There are certain cache types in which one is supposed to message the cache owner for confirmation, such as earth caches and virtual caches.  What if, instead of messaging the owner for permission to log a find, a geofence was established for those cache types in which the questions could be answered directly for the cache online, which instead of giving you a find like with ALs, allowed you to log the cache as found.  Then one wouldn't need to message the cache owner, the answers could be more concrete and immediate feedback could be given as to whether you got the answer right.

 

It's not ideal for non-smartphone users, and obviously the idea would have to be thought out more, but it's just an idea that would incorporate some of the new tech with the existing game.

 

Would you then only allow ECs in places that have mobile internet access? And with questions so basic they can be easily answered on the spot in just a few words and deemed correct or incorrect by software? The meatier Earthcaches I've enjoyed the most are the ones in remote places (no phone coverage) that teach some non-trivial geology lesson and, for me anyway, require me to think about the observations I'd made at GZ when composing my answers and log back home. Then there's ones that require homework to complete the answers, like GC60V52 that requires finders to collect a litre of lake water, take it home, boil it down and weigh the amount of salt that's left. How would you do that while inside the geofence?

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

It's not ideal for non-smartphone users, and obviously the idea would have to be thought out more, but it's just an idea that would incorporate some of the new tech with the existing game.

 

1 hour ago, barefootjeff said:

Would you then only allow ECs in places that have mobile internet access? And with questions so basic they can be easily answered on the spot in just a few words and deemed correct or incorrect by software? The meatier Earthcaches I've enjoyed the most are the ones in remote places (no phone coverage) that teach some non-trivial geology lesson and, for me anyway, require me to think about the observations I'd made at GZ when composing my answers and log back home. Then there's ones that require homework to complete the answers, like GC60V52 that requires finders to collect a litre of lake water, take it home, boil it down and weigh the amount of salt that's left. How would you do that while inside the geofence?

 

See bold above and below.

 

Answering earth cache questions, in my opinion, is one of the worst parts of geocaching.  I love earth science, and find the write-ups to be interesting, and I love learning new science facts.  In fact, I'm working on a side project now in which I'm learning all sorts of earth science and physics information.  But standing on a shoreline trying to observe the direction of the tide or determining what sort of layers of rock I'm seeing is so stressful knowing my permission to log a find are determined by my answers.  To top it off, I then am supposed to message the cache owner and get their approval for my answers, by which time I'm probably not around to correct any mistakes I made.  I'd honestly prefer the earth cache to be incorporated more into a mystery cache structure, whereby getting the questions correct would lead one to a cache, but I'm not proposing that sort of change.  I just think it would be an interesting use of the new technology GCHQ is adding to their toolbox.

 

Just my opinion.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

I just think it would be an interesting use of the new technology GCHQ is adding to their toolbox.

 

If that technology requires mobile data access, which seems to be where they're heading, in this part of the world that would confine caching to just urban areas and along major highways and would rule out many of the places in the wilds where I most enjoy the game. This spot, where my most recent cache (GC92WV1) is hiding, has no coverage in the valley and even on the ridge-top it's pretty marginal.

 

696dd142-cda2-4f02-9e11-7269fd228d55.jpg

  • Helpful 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

If that technology requires mobile data access, which seems to be where they're heading, in this part of the world that would confine caching to just urban areas and along major highways and would rule out many of the places in the wilds where I most enjoy the game. This spot, where my most recent cache (GC92WV1) is hiding, has no coverage in the valley and even on the ridge-top it's pretty marginal.

 

696dd142-cda2-4f02-9e11-7269fd228d55.jpg

 

First, that's a beautiful photo, and I hope that someday I'll get to visit your country.

 

The thing with GPS-enabled smartphones is that they don't require connection to a cellular network for GPS to work.  Each time I travel outside the US, I download the caches I may want to find into my smartphone app (Cachly in my case), download Google maps into my phone, and while I'm away my phone is in airplane mode.  So, in theory, if GCHQ wanted to do something like this, as long as you had the cache downloaded into your phone, you wouldn't need to have a cellular connection.  When you got back into cellular range, you could sync back up with the server and be able to log.

 

Like I said, it's just an idea.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

There are certain cache types in which one is supposed to message the cache owner for confirmation, such as earth caches and virtual caches.  What if, instead of messaging the owner for permission to log a find, a geofence was established for those cache types in which the questions could be answered directly for the cache online, which instead of giving you a find like with ALs, allowed you to log the cache as found.  Then one wouldn't need to message the cache owner, the answers could be more concrete and immediate feedback could be given as to whether you got the answer right.

 

As far as Earthcaches go; I'm with Jeff on this one. A good Earthcache really shouldn't be concrete answers; they should vary based on your personal observations and your own interpertaion of the lesson. Think back to High School or college - two people doing the same chemistry experiment can get marginally different answers and based on the prevailing circumstances they can both be right. It'd be hard to capture the essence of an Earthcache in the program you're describing. 

Now virtuals on the other hand, I can see this working for. Provided that some functionality can be made for offline use that's essentially all a virtual is. Show up to GZ, make a note about some concrete feature that verifies you were there and send answers/photo. This seems to lend a hand much more easily to this style of cache.

In fact I'll be honest beyond the whole "multiple finds per AL" thing I really don't see a difference between ALs and Virts... 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

Answering earth cache questions, in my opinion, is one of the worst parts of geocaching.  I love earth science, and find the write-ups to be interesting, and I love learning new science facts.  In fact, I'm working on a side project now in which I'm learning all sorts of earth science and physics information.  But standing on a shoreline trying to observe the direction of the tide or determining what sort of layers of rock I'm seeing is so stressful knowing my permission to log a find are determined by my answers.  To top it off, I then am supposed to message the cache owner and get their approval for my answers, by which time I'm probably not around to correct any mistakes I made.

 

I'm glad you specified "in my opinion" - I don't find EC's stressful at all - I typically take a lot of photos at EC's, and a lot of notes, I enjoy learning, and if I don't "get" something, I'll admit it and make a best guess in my email to the EC owner.  There have been times when hubby and I had differing ideas of the EC lesson, and we submitted our own take on things - n

either of our logs were denied.  Sometimes there is no single answer.  In one case we had to measure the water temperature in a brook- that will vary by the day!  EC's do not lend themselves to the AL style of caching.

 

50 minutes ago, STNolan said:

As far as Earthcaches go; I'm with Jeff on this one. A good Earthcache really shouldn't be concrete answers; they should vary based on your personal observations and your own interpertaion of the lesson.

Exactly! ^^^

 

6 hours ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

There are certain cache types in which one is supposed to message the cache owner for confirmation, such as earth caches and virtual caches.  What if, instead of messaging the owner for permission to log a find, a geofence was established for those cache types in which the questions could be answered directly for the cache online, which instead of giving you a find like with ALs, allowed you to log the cache as found.  Then one wouldn't need to message the cache owner, the answers could be more concrete and immediate feedback could be given as to whether you got the answer right.

 

Virtuals, on the other hand, are like an abbreviated AL, one smilie, sometimes multiple questions but with concrete answers.  I can see this working (potentially) for Virtuals, but not for EC's.  IF there is cellular coverage, for an immediate smilie - or an option to email the CO for confirmation.  I like to number my finds, and having the AL auto add the count feels a bit too automated for me!  If we do an AL in the middle of a caching day, it makes it harder to keep track of the sequence of things....but I digress from the topic at hand (or do I?)

 

 

  • Surprised 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

I'm glad you specified "in my opinion"

 

Of course it's just my opinion.  I wouldn't want to impose my views of any part of the game on anyone.  I know some people LOVE earth caches, and I know some people LOVE adventure labs, while I don't particularly care for either.  One of my favorite cache types are mystery caches, and I create many of those; many in my area can't stand that type of cache and don't bother to find the ones I create.  That's one thing about geocaching that I love, that everyone can play and enjoy the game in their own way.

 

My OP in this sub-thread is really just meant to discuss a way in which the technology used in ALs could be used in mainstream geocaching as well, in this case to automate the "send answer to CO & wait for permission" part.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, GeoElmo6000 said:

When you got back into cellular range, you could sync back up with the server and be able to log.

Yeah, let's let Groundspeak get that working reliably for traditional caches before we start asking them to add whiz-bang offline answer verification features to their app.

Share this post


Link to post

I have read (much of) the above and cannot help thinking about a sport you do not talk about here: strolling. Not a sport, you say? Indeed it has no element of competition, you do not get any points added to whatever, heck you don't even have the effort that is associated with trekking/hiking. You only walk to a place, maybe to another place, then in the end you return. That's it. Lots of people do it, only: they are not geocachers. The latter kind of animal seems to be motivated by a treat, a reward at the end of the effort.

 

I don't know how many geocachers are aware of Groundspeak's proprietary version of strolling, but there can't be many, as GS decided to leave out of the new dashboard the link that has been present in the old one for as long as I can remember. My guess is that hardly anybody clicked it to go visit the Waymarking.com website in the last so many years. Like AL, Waymarking has a separate website and isn't really connected to geocaching. And of course the animals don't get a treat to lure them there.

 

As I see it, AL is the new flavour of strolling and this time, GS decided to include the reward. That's how I interpret the fact that you can increase your counter really fast with it.

 

For the record: I don't particularly like AL, but I don't fulminate against it, I just choose to ignore it. Those who like AL should go strolling. Live and let live.

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, Merino said:

Those who like AL should go strolling.

 

One of the last ALs I did was a 20 Km (12 Miles) tour.  You need to understand that it is not GS and it's not the AL , it is up to the AL owner.  You could come up with an AL which is guiding you to the 5 highest buildings around the globe, or to 5 capitals in the US, or whatever you have in mind.

If it is "strolling", then the AL owner wants it this way.

 

Here you have to use a boat, distance about 10 Miles:

.

Lab1.jpg.56cc3a06f094589c8e6cfa881aafb70f.jpg

 

 

Edited by Mausebiber
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/28/2020 at 11:05 AM, Tshio said:

Like Waymarking and Benchmarking, Adventure Labs should be kept separate from Geocaching.

 

YES! Not to mention this: Adventure Labs should be kept separate from Lab Caches!

 

Adventure Labs, the way they work now, with logs for each stage, waters down geocaching logs. Are Groundspeak considering turning geocaching all virtual? And they are quickly growing. Two new in my area TODAY! So Groundspeak, what is the intention? Are you intentionally moving towards all-virtual? Why not making this a separate activity?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Ragnemalm said:

Are Groundspeak considering turning geocaching all virtual? And they are quickly growing. Two new in my area TODAY! So Groundspeak, what is the intention? Are you intentionally moving towards all-virtual? Why not making this a separate activity?

 

Interesting point, it has come up in discussions on AL in my personal GC circle: does GS want to go all virtual in the end? There are some advantages for them: no physical containers, so no more angry mails/phone calls from muggles who have problems with cachers littering "their" woods/parks/streets. Exit the Complaints Handling Lackey. You publish an AL all by yourself, no basic check if a listing/AL is evidently below standard, hence no reviewers are needed any more. Not a big saving for GS, but one more task they can discard of. Exit the Reviewer Management Lackey.

 

As for the rapidly increasing numbers of AL: a while ago I published one in my little town (17K inhabitants) in the same week as someone else. Both are overlapping in part. This will happen more and more, as there is no need to know what else is already present in the area or on the verge of being published, unlike geocaches where you need to know where existing ones are, if only to respect the .1 mile rule. And the AL that are in the pipeline but as yet unpublished don't get stopped by a reviewer for being too close (in content).

Edited by Keystone
promotion of competing game removed by moderator

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

Here you have to use a boat, distance about 10 Miles:

.

Lab1.jpg.56cc3a06f094589c8e6cfa881aafb70f.jpg

 

 

 

And once again I have to say that without a scale on the map it's almost impossible to tell how far that is unless you're familiar with the area. Are those named places cities or suburbs? Is the water a broad river or a creek? The only way to tell is to compare it to another map that does have a scale. Sheeze.

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, Merino said:

Interesting point, it has come up in discussions on AL in my personal GC circle: does GS want to go all virtual in the end? There are some advantages for them: no physical containers, so no more angry mails/phone calls from muggles who have problems with cachers littering "their" woods/parks/streets. Exit the Complaints Handling Lackey. You publish an AL all by yourself, no basic check if a listing/AL is evidently below standard, hence no reviewers are needed any more. Not a big saving for GS, but one more task they can discard of. Exit the Reviewer Management Lackey.

 

The only run-in I've had with a muggle was a woman who insisted the national park I was in was her private property and even put up a hand-written sign to that effect. For that one, I wasn't planning on putting anything physical there, it was just going to be a virtual waypoint in a multi, but she and her two large hungry dogs objected strongly to me just walking along that trail. An AL wouldn't work any better there, in fact it might not work at all if there's no phone coverage down in that gully. A lot of the nice caching places here don't have any phone coverage, so if that's their intention it'll pretty much wipe out the game and it'll just be walk to the junction of Fred and Wilma Streets and key in the third word in the sign on the lamp post. That soon gets pretty boring once the novelty of the fancy new app wears off.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

And once again I have to say that without a scale on the map it's almost impossible to tell how far that is

 

about 10 Miles, I told you right there. Why do you want it to compare with something else, it's just a sample to show, that there is more than "strolling".  The river is the Neckar river near Heidelberg:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neckar

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

 

about 10 Miles, I told you right there. Why do you want it to compare with something else, it's just a sample to show, that there is more than "strolling".  The river is the Neckar river near Heidelberg:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neckar

 

 

Yes, I know you said it's 10 miles, but from just looking at the map in the app it's impossible to tell that! It could just as easily be a few hundred metres along a narrow stream or 100km along a substantial river. Why is there no scale on the map? My guess is that the app's designers think scales look ugly and these days form always wins over function. I remember the fight it took to get a scale on the new website search map when it was introduced a year or so back.

Edited by barefootjeff

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Mausebiber said:

You need to understand that it is not GS and it's not the AL , it is up to the AL owner.  You could come up with an AL which is guiding you to the 5 highest buildings around the globe, or to 5 capitals in the US, or whatever you have in mind.


Yet in the Help Center, the advice is:

  • Set up your experience so all locations can be visited within two (2) hours, ideally walkable.

(https://www.geocaching.com/help/index.php?pg=kb.chapter&id=143)


Seems like HQ have a preference...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 9

×
×
  • Create New...